Gaming on Paper
Nick Montfort's Continuous Paper provides an in-depth look at print interfaces and early computer writing. We sometimes "assume that the screen is not just an important part of human-computer interface today, but an essential aspect of all creative and communicative computing." That simply is not true. Montfont gives three examples of early computer programs that were paper-based: Eliza/Doctor, Hunt the Wumpus, and Adventure. (It is still amazing to me that some of these early programs could send e-mails... in the '70's!)
I cannot help to think that maybe these early gamers - making maps, reading the text on paper, entering punchcards - had more fun experiencing the gamers than those today. We have come to expect surperb graphics and loads of help throughout. Either way, Montfort's conclusion that "neither our office nor our literary and artistic future will become paperless" might just be the truth.
I cannot help to think that maybe these early gamers - making maps, reading the text on paper, entering punchcards - had more fun experiencing the gamers than those today. We have come to expect surperb graphics and loads of help throughout. Either way, Montfort's conclusion that "neither our office nor our literary and artistic future will become paperless" might just be the truth.
4 Comments
Leave a comment
Recent Comments
keith Campbell on Gaming on Paper: I also agree with you Susan. I
Dennis G. Jerz on Gaming on Paper: Good point, Susan. The first g
Susan Carmichael on Gaming on Paper: It seems like it is more about
Jeremy Barrick on Gaming on Paper: I feel that games nowadays are
Dennis G. Jerz on Gaming on Paper: Good point, Susan. The first g
Susan Carmichael on Gaming on Paper: It seems like it is more about
Jeremy Barrick on Gaming on Paper: I feel that games nowadays are
I feel that games nowadays are like cattle. They are hearded in as fast as they are hearded out. Back then, there was probably more fun in design. It seems so failproof these days.
It seems like it is more about money today than it was back then.
Good point, Susan. The first games were created as diversions and amusements for programmers to show each other how clever they were, and they became popular as a way to show non-programmers what computers were actually good for.
The big money, and big stakes, in the modern gaming industry is one reason so many games look like cookie-cutter versions of successful predecessors. Few companies are willing to pay millions of dollars to push the envelope, when they can instead meet the needs of those gamers who will pay for the delivery of more of the same. (This is one reason Koster pushes the value of learning new things -- he wants gamers to keep pushing ahead, and demanding new experiences.)
I also agree with you Susan. I think that if we were not always expecting the best graphics and things like that we might be able to appreciate the games we play more and be able to enjoy them.